Content deleted Content added
Typo |
No edit summary |
||
Line 32:
:It's important to note that this section is supposed to be a description of the algorithm, not a full fledged proof, so points which are justified inline with the algorithm should be brief. I think that the explanations you've written are a little too long. I understand your concern that the claim "final and minimal" is only justified in the next step; perhaps the earlier steps should deal with "srewritten to match the pseudocode more closely?
:Currently, Step 2 says "Set the current node to be the starting node", Step 3 deals with the current node – "For the current node...", and Step 5 deals with the selection of the next node – "select the one with the smallest known distance".
:To better approximate the actual algorithm, would you suggest rewriting Step 3 to be on the lines of "Select the unvisited node with the smallest distance to be the current node"
:With this structure, you could justify the points you made in step 4 much more concisely, rather than long proof sketches which refer to the next step. [[User:IntGrah|IntGrah]] ([[User talk:IntGrah|talk]]) 12:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
| |||